In the March 25 issue of The Weekly Standard, the lead article entitled "The Heretic" deals with philosopher Thomas Nagel, who has abandoned his long-held perspective on philosophy and religion. This has caused consternation and alarm among contemporary philosophy professors, the great majority of whom are strongly committed to an atheistic world-view. A recurring assertion by members of that profession is that they are being very scientific, because science disproves religion.

The question arises, "Where did the idea come from that science disproves religion?" It didn't come from within science; rather, it's the province of non-scientists making statements about science. To understand its origins, the foremost thing to note is that academic philosophers are by and large a group with limited understanding of science -- having passed their science requirement in college, most haven't gone deeper to investigate real science and discover the limits of science. Their familiar claim that science supports atheism result from their misunderstanding of science. Here is my scientific perspective about what happened over the past century:

As the 19th century was coming to a close, classical physics was in very good shape (Newtonian mechanics plus Maxwell's equations for electromagnetism). There was a strong belief in determinism, the notion that absolutely everything behaved over time according to the exact laws of physics. Quantum Mechanics and the uncertainty principle were still decades in the future.

Accompanying that belief in determinism in nature, the philosophers wanted their system of thought to be deterministic too, with every valid philosophical statement following logically from a previous one, all the way back to some "mathematical proof" at the basic level. Bertrand Russell advocated that way of thinking.

In the first quarter of the 20th century, the system of "logical positivism" gained dominance among philosophical schools.

Science doesnt have much to say about religion. It can describe the mechanism behind how stars are created, but not the identity of the creator of that mechanism.

Exactly.

The center piece of Christianity is the life, death and resurrection Jesus. Science has no more to say on the on the events of the life of Jesus than any other historical figure. IOW, science can't confirm George Washington lived. Nor Plato or any other figure.

6
posted on 03/26/2013 9:17:47 AM PDT
by Gamecock
( If we distort the gospel, that distortion will influence and affect everything else that we believe)

The true treat thinkers (e.g., physicists, not mere philosophers) were not exactly against religion.

One very good book on this is “Quantum Questions” edited by Ken Wilber. Check out some of the philosophical writing of some of the greats of quantum physics who appear to have much more ability to think in terms of philosophy (and even religion) than philosophers appear to have in terms of modern physics.

I also can recommend a book entitled, “Does God Believe in Atheists?”. It does a great job of setting the stage going back to ancient times and how philosophical paradigms strongly influence what we would ordinarily consider “objective” research and analysis.

I don’t know about that. There have been some interesting scientific studies of the Shroud of Turin that strongly indicate that a supernatural event caused the image of Christ on the Shroud. These studies are explained in detail in the History Channel’s documentary “The Real Face of Jesus.”

11
posted on 03/26/2013 9:32:39 AM PDT
by HerrBlucher
(Praise to the Lord the Almighty the King of Creation)

Perhaps quantum mechanics is a baby step in that direction, a first peek into a realm where we find supernatural ghosts in the atom, as were all previous discoveries, marching toward the ultimate understanding of existence and our place in it.

Is God and religion waiting at the end of the line? I can think of no good reason to insist that science remain godless forever. Maybe it's just the skeptics destined path.

I have been watching a british tv series on Netflix called “Primeval.” It is about time anomalies opening up and creatures from the past and future coming through them into modern times. Its a cool show and devoid of the usual PC and smut garbage pervading most tv shows.

In one of the episodes a woman who believes that humans are evil goes back in time to try and kill the first humans so as to prevent mankind from ever spreading across the globe.

13
posted on 03/26/2013 9:36:57 AM PDT
by HerrBlucher
(Praise to the Lord the Almighty the King of Creation)

Of course not, but maybe some skeptics might see that evidence and cause them to re-think their skepticism. The bodily resurrection of Christ as a historical fact is also supported by the 500 witnesses who saw the resurrected Christ after his death, and of course, by the fact that the Apostles were willing to be martyred in the most painful and gruesome ways. They would not have done that for a hallucination.

Christianity is a religion based on historical facts that can be investigated. This is the foundation of all Christian apologetics.

16
posted on 03/26/2013 9:51:12 AM PDT
by HerrBlucher
(Praise to the Lord the Almighty the King of Creation)

If science could provide convincing evidence for God then faith wouldn’t be needed. Faith is the evidence of things unseen and without faith it is impossible to please God. God wants us to have faith and to seek him. He doesn’t say HERE I AM, NO NEED TO SEEK.

18
posted on 03/26/2013 10:05:55 AM PDT
by allmendream
(Tea Party did not send GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism)

If science could provide convincing evidence for God then faith wouldnt be needed. Faith is the evidence of things unseen and without faith it is impossible to please God. God wants us to have faith and to seek him. He doesnt say HERE I AM, NO NEED TO SEEK.

You obviously know much more than me about everything...or you just think you do.

I'm very astonished that the scientific picture of the real world is very deficient. It gives a lot of factual information, puts all our experience in a magnificently consistent order, but it is ghastly silent about all and sundry that is really near to our heart, that really matters to us. It cannot tell us a word about red and blue, bitter and sweet, physical pain and physical delight, knows nothing of beautiful and ugly, good or bad, God and eternity. Science sometimes pretends to answer questions in these domains, but the answers are very often so silly that we are not inclined to take them seriously. Erwin Schrodinger

I shall reexamine the suppositions underlying our belief in science and propose to show that they are more extensive than is usually thought. They will appear to coextend with the entire spiritual foundations of man and to go to the very root of his social existence. Hence I will urge our belief in science should be regarded as a token of much wider convictions. Michael Polanyi

Let no one think or maintain that a person can search too far or be too well studied in either the book of God's word or the book of God's works. Francis Bacon

I believe only and alone in the service of Jesus Christ. In him is all refuge and solace. Johannes Kepler

God makes people conscious of their inward wretchedness, which the Bible calls "sin" and his infinite mercy. Unites himself to their inmost soul, fills it with humility and joy, with confidence and love, renders them incapable of any other end than Himself. Jesus Christ is the end of all and the center to which all tends. Blaise Pascal

At the center of every human being is a Godshaped vacuum which can only be filled by Jesus Christ. Blaise Pascal

This most beautiful system of the sun, planets and comets could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being . There are more sure marks of authenticity in the Bible than in any profane history. It must be expressed in the very form of sound words in which it was delivered by the apostles. For men are apt to run into partings about deductions. All the old heresies lie in deductions . The true faith was in the Biblical texts. Isaac Newton

Boyle, Newton and the early members of the Royal Society were religious men who repudiated the skeptical doctrines of Thomas Hobbs. But they familiarized the minds of their countrymen with the idea of law in the universe and with scientific methods of inquiry to discover truth. It was believed that these methods would never lead to any conclusions inconsistent with Biblical history and miraculous religion. Newton lived and died in that faith. George Trevellian

Speculations, man, I have none. I have certainties. I thank God that I don't rest my dying head upon speculations for "I know whom I have believed and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I've committed unto him against that day." Michael Faraday

Think what God has determined to do to all those who submit themselves to his righteousness and are willing to receive his gift [of eternal life in Jesus Christ]. They are to be conformed to the image of his Son and when that is fulfilled and God sees they are conformed to the image of Christ, there can be no more condemnation. James Clerk Maxwell

Do not be afraid to be free thinkers. If you think strongly enough, you will be forced by science to the belief in God. William Thomson (later known as Lord Kelvin)

You will understand that my atheism was inevitably based on what I believed to be the findings of the sciences and those findings, not being a scientist, I had to take on trust, in fact, on authority.  C. S. Lewis

In the distance tower still higher [scientific] peaks which will yield to those who ascend them still wider prospects and deepen the feeling whose truth is emphasized by every advance in science, that great are the works of the Lord. J. J. Thomson

There were some ten of us and together we sought for God and together we found Him. I learned for the first time in my life that God was my friend. God became real to me, utterly real. I knew Him and could talk with Him as I never imagined it before and these prayers were the most glorious moment of the day. Life had a purpose and that purpose coloured everything. Charles Coulson

If we need an atheist for a debate, I'd go to the philosophy departmentthe physics department isn't much use. Otto Stern

Some nonscientist Christians, when they meet a Christian, will call on to debate evolution. That is definitely the wrong thing to do. If you know what problems scientists have in their livespride, selfish ambition, jealousythat's exactly the kind of thing Jesus Christ said that He came to resolve by His death on the cross. Science is full of people with very strong egos who get into conflict with each other. The gospel is the same for scientists as it is for anyone. Evolution is basically a red herring; if scientists are looking for meaning in their lives, it won't be found in evolution. I have never met a nonChristian who brought up evolution with me. John Suppe

You may well ask, "Where does God come into this," to me, that's almost a pointless question. If you believe in God at all, there is no particular "where"He is always there, everywhere .To me, God is personal yet omnipresent. A great source of strength, He has made an enormous difference to me. Charles H. Townes

We are fortunate to have the Bible, and especially the New Testament, which tells so much about God in widely accessible, human terms. Arthur Schawlow

The world is too complicated in all its parts and interconnections to be due to chance I am convinced that the existence of life with all its order and each of its organisms is simply too well put together. Allan Sandage

God has given us an incredibly fascinating world to live in and explore. William Phillips

The present arrangement of matter indicates a very special choice of initial conditions. Paul Davies

A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. Fred Hoyle

Since the creation of the world, God's invisible qualitiesHis eternal power and divine naturehave been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made. Apostle Paul

The nature of God is not to be found within any part of the findings of science. For that, one must turn to the Scriptures. Allan Sandage

There is a tremendous tradition of distinguished scientists who were and are Christians. I hope that my work is considered sufficiently outstanding to fall into the distinguished among that category. I also hope I have given you enough evidence that you will never again believe that it is impossible to be a scientist and a Christian. Dr. Henry F. Schaefer, III

23
posted on 03/26/2013 11:03:13 AM PDT
by Heartlander
(Scientists animated by the purpose of proving that they are purposeless are interesting to study)

Likewise, things that make sense to you, may not make sense to me. But at least I'm aware that that's just the way it is, and I don't pretend otherwise. Your comments have an air of infallibility in them, and I'm thinking perhaps God wouldn't like that too much. What do you think?

An fascinating book to read is "The Science of God: The Convergence of Scientific and Biblical Wisdom" by Gerald L. Schroeder:

Dr. Schroeder is a physicist and a devout Jew. Rather than use science to "prove" the bible, he instead draws parallels between a variety of biblical teachings and the findings of biochemists, paleontologists, astrophysicists, and quantum physicists.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.